• Jenniferrr [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    17 days ago

    So it looks like they can get the power back to earth with microwaves. How efficient is this? Do they lose significant energy in the atmosphere?

    This is really cool though. I’m very jealous about what they have to look forward to over in China, I would love to be a part of a project like this

      • Pili [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        17 days ago

        I’m still confused if the efficiency is 95%, 75%, or 54%, but even if it’s the lowest one it’s still pretty good, higher than I expected.

        • hotspur@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          17 days ago

          It looks like the overall efficiency is 54%, which is probably the aggregate efficiency of the various different efficiencies listed of the sub components. Like you say though, that’s better than I would have guessed as a non-expert, and given that being in orbit massively increases the efficiency of the solar panels, it’s probably a decent scheme.

          I’m still curious about the microwave beam though, does it just fry anything that happens to accidentally pass through it? Can you re-aim it at a new receiver plant in a completely different location based on regional power need, etc?

          • Pili [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            17 days ago

            Thanks!

            Yeah, if it really collects “more energy in a year than ‘all the oil on Earth’” you probably don’t want to be on the path of the microwaves.

          • BodyBySisyphus [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            17 days ago

            Presumably you’d separate it into smaller beams that only focus at the receiver, kinda like how holding up a magnifying glass to the sun doesn’t fry everything between the magnifying glass and the target, just the target itself.

            • hotspur@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              17 days ago

              Oh yeah that’s a good point, hadn’t thought of it like that. You could have distributed beam origins pointing towards one large receiver. Or multiple arrays but have them aimed at one receiver, etc.

          • kristina [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            17 days ago

            I’m still curious about the microwave beam though, does it just fry anything that happens to accidentally pass through it? Can you re-aim it at a new receiver plant in a completely different location based on regional power need, etc?

            it can kill smaller creatures within a minute, though i imagine it would be quite painful and obvious that its happening so they would likely just move out of the way before too much harm happens. this is also resolved by having many specific safe areas for unloading the microwaves and also reducing the amount sent.

    • kristina [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      yeah theres some laser and microwave tech theyve been working on to beam it down to earth star trek-like. prolonged exposure can fuck you up, theres also been talk about using it to charge electronics in war zones, safety be damned. research says that if a mouse were in the direct area itd die within a minute lmao

      there are of course ways to counteract this. unironically, tin foil hats and suits. but also just reducing the amount of microwaves sent and increasing the number of landing points would also help